Mick 28:
Aww, somebody’s gonna cwy…bad Mr. JohnnyBlaze called you names…there there, you might need a hug. Oh, wait a minute - if hugging were made illegal you wouldn’t be able to get one because you’re the type of person who follows rules. lol.
Look, I may have been a bit hasty to pull the trigger, but the problem with you, Mick, is that you are quite tactless. You’re like the schmuck who taunts someone and then gets upset when they throw the first punch. You come into a thread into topics you are ignorant about and then post smart aleck comments; and in some of these threads people are passionate about the topic - so it’s no surprise you find yourself incessantly arguing with everyone. Perhaps it entertains you - that’s what I suppose. But then that is behaviour characteristic of a troll. Mischaracterization and ridicule are also tools of the troll. You call perfectly reasonable arguments inane, lame or ridiculous, and you express a blatant lack of respect for other guys’ points of view. You miscomprehend what is said and then post an opinion. You challenge to provide data without showing data yourself. You use logical fallacies and circular reasoning. I’ve seen you doing this with Rainjack in the Barry Bonds thread.
I suggest to you, to improve the quality of your discussion, to read a book such as ‘Smart Thinking - Skills for Critical Understanding and Writing’, Matthew Allen, Oxford University Press: 1997.
If you want a proper debate, you have to learn to address an issue without resorting to excess agonistics or verbal diahrrea.
So let me name a few examples: The Hiphop music thread, you come in there and say hiphop sucks ass. You don’t know anything about hiphop - ignorance. The Barry Bonds baseball/steroid user thread, you taunt guys for being upset about his indictment. It was pointed out that you’re ignorant about baseball (and you don’t know much about steroids either). This thread, you complicate the issue (I’ll get back to that later) and challenge everyone to write a better ‘no affection’ rule. You were ignorant of the actual written rule posted in the OP article in the first place as well.
Saying I mischaracterize is like the pot caling the kettle black - because that is one of the main things you do.There was nothing whiny or immature about any of the words I have said in my posts. In fact, my words were quite strong so that is a blatant mischaracterization. There was not a shred of self-pity or weakness in anything I said to you - I said it to you straight in a critical manner. FYI, I am 30 years old with an 11 year old daughter, and my good man Renton who you were talking to as well is 38. Everything here is man-to-man. We’re all big boys and can handle ourselves.
I have strong feelings about this topic because I would not let my daughter go to a school with such a rule in place, because I believe it would interfere with her development as a person.
Back on point - there was no need for you to complicate the issue of the no affection rule by opening a “pandora’s box of exceptions” and thus create gray areas. My philosophy is to keep it simple. Every rule is separate in and of itself, regarding a particular activity. No spitting. No fighting. No smoking. There are no gray areas in school policy. In my high school days, there were written rules against sexual harrassment or sexual activity on school grounds. That is sufficient. There is no need to confuse affection between people, with harassment or sex. The boundaries between the two are obvious because harassment is an intentional sexual advance on a person who feels uncomfortable with the advance. Affection is a hug, a peck, an arm around the shoulder, holding hands. Sex is humping, grabbing and fondling of private parts. It really is that simple to distinguish the two.
They did not put out a blanket rule to stop public affection crossing boundaries to become sex. They just didn’t think public affection is appropriate per se. So that’s what I think is fucking wrong!
Here is the original rule:
“Displays of affection should not occur on the school campus at any time. It is in poor taste, reflects poor judgment, and brings discredit to the school and to the persons involved.”
